CHAPTER II

LAW OF RECOGNITION IN THE ASSOCIATED ARTS

Explanation of the law--Its application to poetry--To sculpture--To

painting--To fiction.

While we are unable to explain, logically and completely, our

appreciation of what we understand as beauty, experience has taught us

that there are certain phenomena connected with aesthetic perception

which are so regular and undeviating in their application as to have all

the force of law. The first and most important of these phenomena

relates to the interval of time elapsing between the sense perception of

a thing of art, and the recognition by the mind of the beauty therein.

We know from common experience of the Associated Arts that if one fails

to appreciate a work almost immediately after comprehending its nature

and purport, he arrives at the conclusion that there is no beauty

therein, or at least that the beauty is so obscure as to be scarcely

worth consideration. But sometimes on further acquaintance with the work

the view of the observer may be changed, and he may become aware of a

certain beauty which he did not before appreciate. We notice also that

when the beauty is comparatively high, it is more rapidly recognized

than when it is comparatively low. Continuing the examination we arrive

at what is evidently an unalterable law, namely, that the higher the

aesthetic value in a particular sphere of art, the more rapidly is the

beauty therein recognized; that is to say, given any two works, other

things being equal, that is the higher art the beauty in which is the

more quickly conveyed to the mind of the observer after contact with it,

and precisely to the extent to which the reasoning powers are required

to be exercised in comprehending the work, so the beauty therein is

diminished. The law may be called for convenience the Law of

Recognition.

But there are different kinds of beauty as well as degrees. One kind may

be more quickly recognized, and yet make a weaker impression on the

mind, a condition which is due to the varying relations between the

sensorial and intellectual elements in the works. We note that in all

the Associated Arts, as the works therein descend in aesthetic value, the

emotional element becomes more evident, and consequently the impression

received, less permanent. But sensorial beauty is the first essential in

a work of art: hence while the direct appeal to the mind must be made as

strong as possible, this must not be done at the expense of the

emotional elements. We unconsciously measure the emotional with the

intellectual effect, and if the former does not at least equal the

latter, we reject the work as inferior art. A painted Madonna wanting in

beauty of features is instantly and properly condemned even if her

figure be enshrined within surroundings of saintly glories which in

themselves make a powerful appeal to the mind. In fact the highest

reaches in art were probably originally suggested by the necessity of

balancing the one with the other form of beauty. The highest

intellectual considerations seem to rise far above any emotional

experiences connected with ordinary life, and hence to enable these

considerations to enter the domain of art, the divine must be introduced

so that the artist may extend his imaginative scope for the provision of

emotional effects commensurate, as far as possible, with the importance

of his appeal to the mind. Hence in all arts which combine an

intellectual with an emotional appeal, the highest forms must ever be

connected with the spiritual.

In other grades of these arts also, the artist has to use special means

to maintain a due balance between the two kinds of beauty. Shakespeare

could not give men and women of every-day experience the wisdom, the

judgment, and the foresight necessary for the presentation of the

powerful pictures which some of his characters throw upon the mind, so

he raises them above the level of life by according them greater virtues

and nobler passions than are to be found in people of actual experience.

The supreme emotional effects he produces seem perfectly appropriate

therefore to the intellectual appeals. In the next lower form of art,

where the representation does not go beyond life experience, the

emotional appeal is of still greater relative importance because the

appeal to the mind is rarely striking. The emotional effect here may

indeed be so overpowering that the purely mental considerations are

lost sight of, and we observe that in all the greater works of art in

the division, whether of poetry, painting, sculpture, or fiction, the

intellectual appeal is vastly exceeded by the emotional. When we reach

the grade which deals with subjects inferior to the average level of

human life, as the representation of animals, landscape, humour,

still-life, the sensorial effect must be exceedingly strong relatively,

otherwise the art would scarcely be recognizable, the appeal to the mind

being necessarily weak.

It is clearly compulsory then that the Associated Arts, all of which may

appeal to the mind as well as to the senses, should be separated into

divisions for the purpose of applying the Law of Recognition, and these

divisions are obvious, for they are marked by the strongest natural

boundary lines. They are: 1. The art which deals with divinities. 2.

That which exhibits beauty above life experience, but does not reach the

divine. 3. That which represents life. 4. That which produces

representations inferior to life. This separation corresponds with that

applied by Aristotle to poetry and painting, except that he joined the

two first sections into one, which he described as better than life. But

the division of the great philosopher, while being sufficient for his

purpose, is hardly close enough for the full consideration of the kinds

of beauty, since it puts in the same class, representations of the

divinity and the superman--joins Homer and Phidias with Praxiteles and

Raphael. In dealing with the divine the artist need place no limit to

his imagination in the presentation of his picture, whereas with the

superman he must circumscribe his fancy within the limits of what may

appear to the senses to be possibly natural. It is true that the poet

may use the supernatural as distinguished from the divine, to enable him

to extend his imaginative scope, and so give us beautiful pictures which

would be otherwise unpresentable. Shakespeare makes us imagine Puck

encircling the earth in forty minutes, and Shelley shows us iron-winged

beings climbing the wind, but we immediately recognize these pictures as

figures of fancy, or as in the nature of allegory, and they do not

impress us so deeply as the miraculous flight of a goddess of Homer, or

an assemblage of the satellites of Satan in the Hell of Milton, for we

involuntarily regard these events as compatible with the religious faith

of great nations, and so as having a nearer apparent semblance of truth.

Sacred art therefore, being capable of providing beauty of a much higher

kind than any other form, should be placed in a separate section for the

purpose of considering the law under discussion. Only poetry among the

arts is capable of appropriately representing divine actions, and only

sculpture of producing a form so perfect as to bring a divinity to mind.

Hence these arts are alone concerned with the Law of Recognition as

applied to the first section of the Associated Arts.

The law applies to all the Associated Arts, and to all sections of them,

except the lowest form of painting--that represented by harmony of

colour without appeal to the mind of any kind--but this form is so weak

and exceptional that it need hardly be considered in the general

proposition. Indeed we might reasonably argue that it does not come

within the fine arts, as it is produced by a mechanical arrangement of

things with fixed and unalterable physical properties.

The law cannot apply to music and architecture, for the effects of these

are purely emotional, and so directly vary with conditions of time and

place respectively. A work of architecture may seem more beautiful in

one place than in another; and a work of music more or less beautiful

according as it more or less synchronizes with emotional conditions of

human activity surrounding the hearer at the time of the performance.

While this law is unvarying in the Associated Arts, there are artificial

restrictions which must be considered in order that apparent deviations

from it may be understood. Special restrictions in relation to the

higher poetry and sculpture are mentioned later on, but there is also an

important general restriction. The sense nerves and the imagination,

like all other functions, must be exercised in order that normal healthy

conditions may be retained; but a large section of the people, by force

of circumstances or want of will, have neglected this exercise, and so

through disuse or misuse these functions are often in a condition which

is little more than rudimentary. Hence such persons are practically

debarred from appreciation of many forms of art, and particularly those

wherein intellectual beauty is a marked feature. In discussing the

operation of this law amongst people in general therefore, the writer

must be understood to refer only to that section of the community whose

sense nerves and imaginations may be supposed to be in a healthy, active

condition.

Experience with all the Associated Arts has clearly demonstrated the

validity of this law. The strength of the devices used by the poet lies

in simplifying the presentation of his pictures. Metaphor is necessary

to the poet, for without it he would be powerless to present pictures

made up of a number of parts, but he also uses it for the purpose of

throwing simple images upon the mind more rapidly, and consequently more

forcibly, than would be possible if direct means were employed; and the

beauty of the metaphor appears the greater according as it more

completely fills in the picture which the poet is desirous of

presenting. When other artifices than metaphor or simile are applied,

the result only appears very beautiful when the condensation of the

language used is extreme, and when there is no break in the delineation

of the action. A few supreme examples of beauty derived from the

principal devices of the poet for presenting his pictures may be

instanced, and it will be found that in each case the power of the image

is directly due to the brevity of expression, the simplicity of

description and metaphor, or the unimpeded representation of action.

More than three thousand years have passed since the period assigned to

Helen of Troy, and yet each generation of men and women as they learn of

her, have deeply sealed upon their minds the impression that she was of

surpassing beauty, almost beyond the reach of human conception. We have

practically no details of her appearance from Homer or Hesiod, except

that she was neat-ankled, white-armed, rich-haired, and had the

sparkling eyes of the Graces, but already in the time of Hesiod her

renown "spread over the earth." What was it then that established the

eternal fame of her beauty? Simply a few words of Homer indicating the

startling effect of her appearance before the elders of Troy. We are

allowed to infer that these dry, shrunken-formed sages, shrill-voiced

with age, became passionately disturbed by a mere glance at her figure,

and nervously agreed with each other that little blame attached to the

Greeks and Trojans for suffering such long and severe hardships on

account of her, for only with the goddesses could she be compared. How

wondrous must be the beauty when a glimpse of it suffices to hasten the

blood through shrivelled veins, and provoke tempestuous currents to

awake atrophied nerves! Without the record of this incident, the vague

notices of Helen's appearance would be very far from sufficient to

account for the universal recognition of her marvellous beauty.[22]

[Illustration: PLATE 7 (See page 122)

Greek Sculpture, 4th Century B.C. Attributed to Scopas

Greek Bronze, 3d Century B.C.

Heads of Demeter]

One of the finest lines of Shakespeare is, "How sweet the moonlight

sleeps upon this bank." The beauty of the line rests entirely upon the

use of the word "sleeps" to express something which could not be

otherwise said without the use of many words. The moonbeam is apparently

perfectly still, the atmosphere calm, and there is nothing in the

surroundings to disturb the natural tranquillity, these conditions

inducing a feeling of softness and rest in the observer. If it had been

necessary to say all this, Shakespeare would certainly have omitted

reference to the moonlight, but his powerful imagination brings to mind

the word "sleeps" to express the conditions, and we are overwhelmed with

a beautiful picture suddenly thrown on the brain as if by a brilliant

flash of light.

Among the many illustrations of the point which may be found in the

Bible, is the great passage, "And God said, 'Let there be Light,' and

there was Light." This is described by Longinus as nobly expressed, but

he does not suggest any cause for its aesthetic effect. It is true that

nothing could be finer, but the nobility of the expression is derived

from its brevity--from the extreme rapidity with which so vast and

potent an event as an act of creation is pictured on the brain.[23] A

description of an act of creation, although involving psychological

considerations of sublimity, is not necessarily so beautiful in

expression as to be a work of art.

In the case of lyric poetry, brevity of expression, though still of high

importance, is not of so much moment as in epic or dramatic verse,

because the substance is subordinated to beauty of expression and

musical form. Devices are used chiefly for strengthening the sensorial

element, the appeal to the mind being in most cases secondary.

Nevertheless the lyric poet wastes no words. Take for example Sappho's

_Ode to Anactoria_. The substance of these amazing lines is

comparatively insignificant, being merely the expression of emotion on

the part of an individual consequent upon disappointment, yet the

transcendent beauty of the poem has held enthralled fourscore

generations of men and women, and still the world gasps with

astonishment at its perfection. Obviously the beauty of the ode rests

mainly on qualities of form which cannot be reproduced in translation,

but the substance may be, and it will be observed that the description

of the action is unsurpassable. The picture, the whole picture, and

nothing but the picture, is thrown on the mind rapidly and directly; so

rapidly that the movement of the brush is scarcely discernible, and so

simply that not a thought is required for its elucidation. With the

chain of symptoms broken or less closely connected, the passion

indicated would be comparatively feeble, whatever the force of the

artifices in rhythm and expression which Sappho knew so well how to

employ.[24]

As with poetry, so with the arts of sculpture and painting: the greatest

works result from simple designs. All the sculptures which we recognize

as sublime or highly beautiful, consist of single figures, or in very

rare cases, groups of two or three, and indeed it is difficult to hold

in our minds a carved group of several figures. The images of the Zeus

and Athena of Phidias, though we know little of them except from

literary records and inferior copies, are far more brilliantly mirrored

upon our minds than the Parthenon reliefs. The importance of simplicity

is perhaps more readily seen in sculpture than in any other art, for the

slightest fault in design has an immediate effect upon the mind of the

observer. It is noticeable that the decadence of a great art period is

usually first marked by complications in sculptured figures.[25]

In painting, the pictures which we regard as great are characterized by

their simplicity, and the immediate recognition of their purport. They

are either ideal figures, or groups where at least the central figure is

idealized and commonly known. The work must be grasped at one glance for

the beauty to be of a high order. Hence in the case of frescoes great

artists have not attempted to make the beauty of any part dependent upon

the comprehension of the whole. It is impossible for the eye to take in

at a single glance the whole of a large fresco painting, and this

explains why a fresco celebrated for its beauty is often disappointing

to one who sees it for the first time, and endeavours to impress it on

his mind as a single picture by rapidly piecing together the different

parts.[26] Polygnotus could well paint forty scenes from Homer as mural

decoration in one hall, for they could only be examined and understood

as separate pictures; and the ceiling of Michelangelo at the Vatican is

so arranged that there is no necessity for combining the parts in the

mind. So with the Parma frescoes of Correggio. Raphael had a different

task in his Vatican frescoes, but he accomplished it by arranging his

figures so that each separate group is a beautiful picture; and Lionardo

in his great work at Milan divided the Apostles into groups of three in

order to minimize the consideration necessary for the appreciation of so

large a work.

Fiction is divided into two sections, the novel and the short story, and

they are so distinct in character that they must necessarily be

considered separately in the application of the law under discussion.

Form is of high importance in both classes of the art, but weighs more

in the short story because here the appeal to the mind is unavoidably

restricted. The novelist is capable of producing a higher beauty than is

within the range of the short-story writer. The latter is limited in his

delineation of character to the circumstances surrounding a single

experience, while the novelist, in describing various experiences, may

add shade upon shade in expression and thus elevate the characters and

actions above the level possible of attainment by means of a single

incident. But within his limit the short-story writer may provide his

beauty more easily than the novelist, because a picture can be more

readily freed from complications when away from surroundings, than when

it forms one of a series of pictures which must have connecting links. A

good short story consists of a single incident or experience in a life

history. It is clearly cut, without introduction, and void of a

conclusion which is not directly part of the incident. The subject is of

general interest; the language simple, of common use, and free from

mannerisms; while there are no accessories beyond those essential for

the comprehension of the scheme. These conditions, which imply the most

extreme simplicity, are present in all the greatest short stories known

to us--the best works of the author of the _Contes Nouvelles_, of

Sacchetti, Boccaccio, Margaret of Navarre, Hoffman, Poe, and De

Maupassant. The novel differs from the short story in that it is a large

section of a life with many experiences, but the principles under which

the two varieties of fiction are built up, are precisely the same.

Obviously the limit in length of a novel is that point beyond which the

writer cannot enhance the beauty of character and action, while

maintaining the unity of design. This means the concentration of effort

in the direction of simplicity, facilitating the rapid reception of the

pictures presented by the writer upon the mind of the reader.

It is thus evident that the higher the beauty in the Associated Arts,

the simpler are the signs or sign combinations which produce it; and

hence the Law of Recognition rests on a secure foundation, for the

simple must necessarily be recognized before the complex.

Art Principles with Special Reference to Painting Together with Notes on the Illusions Produced by the Painter · 第 2 / 17 章